Is the federal Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional?

A three-judge panel of the U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeal in Boston has ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional because it prevents gay married couples from receiving the same benefits as heterosexual married couples.

A gay marriage supporter demostrates last July in Albany, New York, just before that state legalized gay marriage. (AP photo)

One judge was a President Reagan appointee, one was appointed by the first President Bush, and one was appointed by President Clinton.

The 1996 federal law defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman and said federal agencies couldn’t pay marriage benefits to couples that didn’t meet that definition. Gay married couples can’t file joint tax returns either.

The appeals court said DOMA’s provisions deprived gay married couples of equality under the law.

The court also said, interestingly, that Congress had no business defining marriage for states. So if Massachusetts and New York want to allow official gay marriage with full rights for the married couple, there’s nothing Congress can do about it.

That still leaves something of a tangle. What happens if a gay couple legally married in New York moves to Florida, where the state constitution bans gay marriage? The appeals court didn’t deal with that.

In fact, the court basically put its decision on hold until the United States Supreme Court can settle the issue of fairness, and perhaps deal with all the related matters as well.

The U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeal doesn’t have jurisdiction in Florida in any case.

What do you think? Is the federal Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional? Leave a comment or click on the link below to take our poll.